CAR SEARCH AFTER TRAFFIC STOP LEADS TO U.S. SUPREME COURT CASE

DES MOINES, Iowa - Patrick Knowles knew he was speeding that day. Just
off work and frustrated that his old car was sputtering, he had
stomped on the gas pedal to keep the engine from dying.

When a policeman drove by and quickly turned around, Knowles knew he
likely would be pulled over and given a speeding ticket.

He did not expect the officer to tell him he needed to search his
car.

"I thought `Now wait a minute, I don't really like this idea,' "
Knowles said. "I was just sitting there. I'd said `Yes, sir. No, sir,'
and been polite."

But Newton Officer Ronald Cook did search Knowles' car without his
permission on March 6, 1996 - legally under Iowa statutes - and found
marijuana and a pipe under the front passenger seat. Knowles said a
friend had left it there, but he was liable because it was in his car.

Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Knowles' argument that the
search violated the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment protection
against unreasonable searches and that the marijuana should not be
used as evidence.

"We believe there is an overwhelming privacy issue involved, that such
a search is invasive, intrusive and, frankly, offensive," said
Knowles' lawyer, Maria Ruhtenberg.

Under Iowa law, police may choose either to make an arrest or issue a
citation for all crimes except forcible felonies.

Where it differs from laws in most states is in allowing officers in
either instance to conduct an "otherwise lawful search." Most laws
permit searches only after an arrest or if the officer believes the
person is involved in something illegal.

Assistant Iowa Attorney General Bridget Chambers said the
justifications for a search with a citation are the same as those in
an arrest: Protect the officer's safety and stop evidence from being
destroyed.

Chambers said traffic stops can be dangerous and officers should not
have to give up a tool that can protect them.

If officers could not conduct searches on the basis of citations, they
could simply choose to make more arrests, Chambers said.

"If they can arrest and search anyway, how does it protect a person's
privacy to require the arrest?" she asked. "We're just saying it's a
lesser intrusion, actually, than an arrest plus search."

But Ruhtenberg argues that officers should have to have some suspicion
of illegal activity to justify a search with only a citation.

At Knowles' trial, Cook testified that he did not suspect Knowles of
criminal activity.

A state trial judge ruled against Knowles' argument that the marijuana
should not be used as evidence. Knowles was convicted of possession of
marijuana and keeping marijuana in his car and sentenced to 90 days in
jail. In October 1997, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld his conviction in
a 5-4 decision.

The case has drawn widespread interest, with the American Civil

Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense
Lawyers filing arguments in support of Knowles' motion and the
National Association of Police Organizations supporting the state's
argument.

Knowles, 37, now lives in Monroe and works at a plastics factory. He
is married and has two children.

"I'm just a regular kind of guy," he said. "I just want to get on with
my life, but I want to get this straightened out first."

Checked-by: Rich O'Grady